OXFORD BIBLIOGRAPHIES IN LINGUISTICS “EVIDENTIALS” by Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald © Oxford University Press, Inc. Not for distribution. For permissions, please email [email protected]. INTRODUCTION MONOGRAPHS ARTICLES EDITED COLLECTIONS EXTENSIONS OF NONEVIDENTIAL CATEGORIES MEANINGS TENSE, ASPECT, AND MOOD EPISTEMIC MODALITY PERSON MARKING MEANINGS IN COMPLEMENTATION REPORTED SPEECH AND INFORMATION SOURCE MIRATIVITY HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT CONTACT-INDUCED CHANGE GRAMMATICALIZATION OF A QUOTATIVE MARKER IN SPANISH VARIETIES AREAL FEATURES CHILD LANGUAGE ACQUISITION INFORMATION SOURCES AND CULTURAL STEREOTYPES INDIVIDUAL AREAS, LANGUAGES, AND FAMILIES Balkan Languages Further Indo-European Languages Turkic Languages Uralic Languages Languages of the Caucasus Tibeto-Burman Languages North American Indian Languages Individual Studies Mesoamerican Languages Languages of the Andes Aymara Quechua Lowland Amazonian Languages Arawak Languages Carib Languages Panoan Languages Tucanoan Languages Tupí-Guaraní Languages Small Language Families and Isolates African Languages Australian Aboriginal Languages Pacific Languages Siberian Languages Japanese Korean Introduction Evidentiality is a grammatical category with source of information as its primary meaning—whether the speaker saw the event happen, did not see it but heard it, made an inference based on general knowledge or visual traces, or was told about it. Languages may distinguish firsthand and nonfirsthand information or have a special marker just for reported evidentiality. In larger evidential systems, firsthand or visual evidential may contrast with nonvisual, inferred, assumed, and reported. Evidentiality is a verbal category in its own right. It does not bear any straightforward relationship to the expression of the speaker’s responsibility or attitude toward the statement. Neither is evidentiality a subcategory of modality or a tense. Nonevidential categories, including perfect aspect, past tense, conditional, and other modalities and complementation devices, can develop meanings related to information source. French linguists employ the term “mediative.” Scholars of Quechua use the term “validational” or “verificational.” Monographs The notion of evidentiality was introduced into general linguistics by Jakobson 1957. Aikhenvald 2004 is the only monograph, as of 2011, dealing exclusively with the category of evidentiality. There are numerous articles dealing with various meanings of evidentials. A number of monographs address epistemic and other modalities and pragmatic notions involving responsibility, control, and authority, with marginal relevance to evidentiality. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality . Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. A comprehensive overview of grammatical evidentiality in a cross-linguistic perspective based on the author’s own fieldwork and on examination of grammars of more than five hundred languages. Deals with the expression, semantics, and pragmatics of evidential systems across the world; their correlations with other categories, including mirativity; their origins and decay; and child language acquisition. Paperback edition with revisions published 2006 (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press). Jakobson, Roman O. 1957. Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb . Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press. Introduces the general notion of evidentiality as a cover term for grammaticalized marking of information source. Articles Franz Boas was the first scholar explicitly to pinpoint the existence of a grammatical category reflecting the information source of a speaker, based on his work on North American Indian languages (Boas 1938). Roman Jakobson was the first scholar to use the term “evidential” and to provide the classical definition (Jakobson 1957, cited in Monographs). Comrie 2000 (cited in Meanings) offers a brief survey of small evidential systems found in Eurasia. Willett 1988 and Kozintseva 1994 provide some cross- linguistic information on evidentiality, now outdated. Aikhenvald 2004 and Joseph 2003 formulate cross-linguistic foundations for typology of evidentiality. Some cross-linguistic information is in De Haan 2005. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality: Problems and challenges. In Linguistics today: Facing a greater challenge . Edited by Piet van Sterkenbourg, 1–29. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. A cross-linguistic account of systems of evidentials, with special focus on languages that mark information source more than once in a clause. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2007. Information source and evidentiality: What can we conclude? Rivista di Linguistica 19.1: 207–227. A discussion of various means of grammatical and lexical expression of information source, including grammatical evidentials, modal verbs, parentheticals, and lexical items. Boas, Franz. 1938. Language. In General anthropology . Edited by Franz Boas, 124–145. Boston and New York: D. C. Heath. A pioneering work explicitly formulating the notion of obligatory marking of information source in North American Indian languages. De Haan, Ferdinand. 2005. Coding of evidentiality. In World atlas of language structures . Edited by Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, and Bernard Comrie, 318–321. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. A somewhat limited summary of the way evidentiality is expressed in some languages. This is based on an artificially limited sample and should be used with caution. Joseph, Brian D. 2003. Evidentials: Summation, questions, prospects. In Studies in evidentiality . Edited by Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald and R. M. W. Dixon, 307–327. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. This paper discusses the possibilities of expressing information source with means other than grammatical evidentials, focusing on evidential-like distinctions in Indo-European languages (also see Further Indo-European Languages). Kozintseva, Natalya. 1994. Kategorija evidentsial’nosti (problemy tipologicheskogo analiza). Voprosy Jazykoznanija 3:92–104. An early but insightful analysis of evidential systems, with a special focus on reported and visual/nonvisual distinctions found in the languages of Eurasia. Squartini, Mario. 2007. Evidentiality between lexicon and grammar. Rivista di Linguistica 19.1: 1–7. A concise account of the lexical expressions of information source and the ways grammatical means, such as modalities, moods, and modal verbs, can be extended to cover evidential-like meanings, arguing for the lack of categorical distinction between lexical and grammatical evidentiality. Willett, Thomas. 1988. A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticization of evidentiality. Studies in Language 12:51–97. The first attempt at a cross-linguistic analysis of grammatical systems of evidentiality, offering generalizations based on limited data. Some have since then been proved wrong. In general, this is outdated. Among inconsistencies one finds are the differences between Willett’s own analysis of Cora in this source and in Willett 1991 (cited in Mesoamerican Languages). Edited Collections Chafe and Nichols 1986 covers a selection of North American, South American, and Tibeto-Burman languages. Guentchéva 1996 contains twenty papers addressing small systems in Indo-European, Turkish, and Uralic and also modality in a variety of languages. Johanson and Utas 2000 (cited in Turkic Languages) contains seven papers on small evidentiality systems in Turkic languages, five on Iranian languages, and a further eight on small evidential systems and semantically related modal marking in Tibeto- Burman, Caucasian, and Uralic languages (see Tibeto-Burman Languages, Languages of the Caucasus, Uralic Languages). Aikhenvald and Dixon 2003 includes analysis of evidential systems of different types and sizes from Eurasia, South America, North America, and the Tibeto-Burman family. Guentchéva 2007 contains eighteen papers discussing fourteen languages from South America and Mesoamerica and four from the Caucasus. Aikhenvald 2007 contains analytic papers on evidentials and mirativity in six Tibeto-Burman languages, with an introduction by the editor detailing advances in the typology of evidentials. Peterson and Sauerland 2010 focuses on evidentials and other verbal categories related to information source in a selection of languages, including Japanese, English, and Tagalog. Wiemer and Stathi 2010 outlines foundations for the analysis of information source marking in selected European languages. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y., ed. 2007. Special issue: Evidentiality . Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 30.2. A collection of six papers focusing on newly discovered systems of evidentials in Tibeto-Burman languages, with a typological introduction. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y., and R. M. W. Dixon, eds. 2003. Studies in evidentiality . Amsterdam: John Benjamins. A collection of fourteen chapters on a variety of evidential systems in twelve languages cast in a common framework (including Abkhaz, Western Apache, Eastern Pomo, Tariana, Jarawara, Macedonian and Albanian, Yukaghir, Turkic, and West Greenlandic), with a typological survey by Aikhenvald and a conclusion by Brian D. Joseph (see Joseph 2003, cited in Articles). Chafe, Wallace L., and Johanna Nichols, eds. 1986. Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology . Norwood, NJ: Ablex. A pioneering, influential collection of eighteen chapters covering evidential systems in North and South American languages, in the Balkan languages, in Tibeto-Burman languages (Sherpa, Akha, and Tibetan), and in Japanese, with an additional focus on epistemic meanings in English and other